Jump to content

Recommended Posts

No James84 (my post was directed at James Barbers unsubstantiated claims btw), I do happen to really believe there is no issue with the unit being in this area and have reasons to back that view up. Youth offenders are not Southwarks biggest criminals. Their misdemeanors range from low level vandalism to burglary. Dangerous teens are locked up in secure units, like all dangerous criminals.


Not arguing for arguments sake at all...but giving a perspective from my own experience of dealing with teens that are offenders and currently under the probabtion service. Surely an informed view is to be welcomed in light of some of the scaremongering above.

The old toilet building on Peckham Rye would serve the purpose.

Although tags on all of them would be better than reporting to a probation officer,the majority of offenders dont take notice of them either.

Being confined at home would be better,and most tag wearers find it embarrassing,a little ridiculing of these numbskulls

is whats needed.

Stocks maybe,pictures on the t.v. Remember the old Police five programme,

No special treatment, like clubs and things to do,they are not special,or deprived,just lazy thieving nasty gits.

They cant even talk properly,so if they cannot pronounce the words properly how can they read and write,and if they cant read and write how can they educate themselves for a better life.Innit get me,

Fair enough DJ I can see your point, but no one can honestly say to me that they arent in the slightest bit disturbed at the prospect of having the majority of Southwarks convicted burglars ( alot of who are reoffenders) travelling into an area of East Dulwich where there is opportunity all around. Its like putting a jar of sweets in front of a child and saying dont eat any of them. Please dont twist the words, I fully appreciate that this thing has to go somewhere, but you cant ask or expect me to be happy about the prospect, that the very guys who potentially burgle me one day, could be 200 metres down the road the next signing with the probation team.
Ah ok...now we get to the real fear...teenage burglars. There are already teenage burglars in the area and in my experience most teenage burglars are opportunists. They look for portable items that are easy to steal and carry, and more often than not steal from those they know. There is no reason think that there will suddenly be a spike in burglary. That is not the evidence from the current location of the unit either. Those attending the unit have no reason to hang around and like I say, most of them are on probation with serious consequences if they reoffend.

DJ you really would argue that black is white wouldnt you, just for the sake of teh argument.


You just said it yourself, burglars on teh whole are opportunists, so why would we want to give them the opportunity by bringing them down to ED and giving them the opportunity to be opportunists in what is a relatively affluent neighbourhood, rich pickings. To be honest where the current unit is located is hardly comparable to ED in terms of opportunity now is it. Burgling one house in ED is going to be pretty profitable on average as opposed to where the current unit is based. And yes given recent events frankly I dont want my wife walking the streets with my daughter in the day with those type of criminals in the area.

You haven't read a single word of what I wrote have you. Teenage burglars do not tend to go out of their way to burgle well securred houses in leafy areas. There is absolutely no evidence to back up your fear. Most of these kids are low level petty theives or vandals and I think it's really sad if you think you need to fear walking the streets. You already do walk amongst low level thieves and vandals. Tell me....do you have the same fear of the Harris Boys Academy.....crikey that's bringing almost 900 teens to the area when full....?

Tarot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> They cant even talk properly,so if they cannot

> pronounce the words properly how can they read and

> write,and if they cant read and write how can

> educate themselves for a better life.Innit get me,



*Implodes*


(edited, missed off my asterisks)

Look DJ, I did read everything you said, if I missed something, perhaps it is the way you write and the lack of clarity than me not reading your post. It is pointless having any kind of discussion with you, you just speak hot air. You say in one breath that these teenage burglars do not go out of their way to burgle leafy areas, well this isn't going out of their way is it if this unit goes ahead, in fact ED will be very much in their way.


You change your points to suit your argument, one minute you are saying that they are responsible for anything from low level vandalism through to burglary, now you say they only low level criminals or vandals. Which is it then? Make up your mind.


I am quite entitled to voice my opinion, like I said it is an opinion and I am not naive enough to realise that this unit has to go somewhere, and ED is as good a place as any, but it doesn't mean I have to like it.


You seem to have an issue with the Harris academy when it suits you, and then when it sits your argument you don't, it just goes to show how fickle and weak some of your arguments are. You will use anything just to argue that black is white.


It is so annoying sometimes DJ that you feel the need to twist words and points to suit your own agenda and support your own argument. I have no interest in continuing this discussion with you, because you are so arrogant and ignorant that you will never accept that some peoples views are different from your own. I have said that my views will not necessarily be right or that you will agree with them, but they are my opinion which I am entitled to have. What gives you the right all of the time to think that your are correct in everything you say. Its boring

Tarot that is an childish and ridiculous arguement.


The reason the building is moving is that the current building is in need of a huge refurb and is part of an estate that is undergoing a redevelopment as far as I am aware. It therefore makes sense to me to move it to a council owned building that has the space. I see no problem in moving it to ED, even though I have a young child and 'walk the streets with them'. I also work with young people, most of whom have / had involvement with youth offending services.


The building is on the opposite side of playground and there is no reason why the this service would impact on children using the playground. The current service is located very close to a nursery / playground and I don't believe that there has been an impact.


Just to add the criticism of Jame's post- how do you know where the staff live and that it will be more inconvenient for them to travel to work? Odd reasoning.


It is not realistic that these kids are going to come and report for their appointment and then go and burgle the next door neighbours, why would they do that?


As OP have stated most are involved with YOS due to low level offending and by attending their appointments are satisfying the conditions of their sentence and hopefully engaging in some constructive work. Some of them might even live in ED (gasp) or other affluent areas of Southwark. They certainly could come here anytime they wanted if that is what they choose. Despite James' post it really is not hard to get to ED from pretty much anywhere in Southwark.


I accept that there is a lot of strong feelings around at the moment but it would be useful to have a look into what youth offending and other services actually consist of before launching into reactionary arguements.

And without entering the debate, because I can't be bothered, DJKQ I just can't follow your logic when you say there are already teenage burglars in the area, therefore the unit is ok/won't make any difference. How does that follow? Surely, if there are MORE teenage burglars in the area because of a unit (presumably quite a few would have been convicted of burglary/theft) then there would be MORE of them in the area, which surely is a consideration is it not? It doesn't mean the situation is the same, just because some are already here does it?!

Magpie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The sporadic outbreaks of disagreement to the board's liberal consensus lasted for a few days,

> but it looks like the lefties are beginning to regain control


Don't get 'liberal' and 'lefty' mixed up - they are quite different and often opposing concepts. I'm a liberal, but not really a lefty.

DB I was making the point that the idea that there will be an increased level of burglary in the area is nonsense and not backed up by any evidence. The offenders that go to the existing unit are from every area of Southwark, inlcuding ED and they go to to attend appointments only, and return home or to school or wherever afterwards. Any suggestion that having the unit in ED will create a new problem (or add to an existing problem) in the area, really is nonsense.


James84 I have no time for the kind of post that resorts to phrases like 'hot air'. You are frustrated because your points are foundering against more informed and reasoned ones - that's all.

I really don't see what this has to do with left and right, other than people spoiling for an argument.


James, I can agree with you that nobody exactly wants this, in that it wouldn't be their first choice. However, I don't understand why people are so against it.


Suggesting that a load of hardened criminals will arrive in dulwich and start looting the place, is an absolute nonsense!

Meeanwhile, back on Topic.


The reason the building is moving is that the current building is in need of a huge refurb and is part of an estate that is undergoing a redevelopment as far as I am aware.


I'd be interested to know if this is true and if the move is therefore temporary. James Barber has given no clear reason for the move...and has been asked to clarify the reaons behind it...i.e. are they financial or as you suggest lisa, temporary pending a refurb. Would be good to have some clarification on this. Will try and find out.

As Otta said, nobody wants it as such. In an ideal world, such facilities would not have to exist at all. But it has to go somewhere, and it just seems self centred to campaign against it.


It also seems strange to suggest that after reporting in, the youths will stick around to harass mums and young kids at the swings over the road.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Nothing to do with the tories overspending whatsoever eh! Blame the last 10/11 years of blatant mismanagement, incompetence and willful deceit on the poor bastards that were left with the fall out of a complete car crash tory government.   One PM after another falling on their sword. Open corruption and piss taking throughout covid and a legacy of huge debt and destruction yet in your view it will be labour's 4 years in power that bankrupts us in 2029.  Another one that must think people are blind and stupid.  Rejoice rejoice. It's a pity he and his fellow clowns were completely annihilated at the ballot box. I mean they were doing so well after all 🙃🙃
    • Where did I say he did a good job? Yup and Corbyn was very close to Len McCluskey and funded by Unite wasn't he...they're all as bad as each other... Labour have to purge their party of the far-left - they're a disaster. Allan Johnson summed it up so well on election night in 2019....  
    • Thank you for the detailed advise @trinidad It is definitely damage we are concerned about. I don’t think Evri would agree to pay the bill to fix our gate or letter box if they were to be damaged as a result of their delivery drivers helper. Our doorbell can be heard from outside when rung so we don’t quite believe the aggressive simultaneous door/letter box banging is necessary. It can be quite a shock it is done very aggressively.  I’ll definitely action the steps you’ve kindly provided along with a phone call tomorrow. I do sympathise with the role drivers have and how busy they are, which is why we tried communicating directly with her but sadly we haven’t succeeded 
    • What outcome would you like? Disciplinary action? Not to have the driver back? Retraining? I know there is alot of pressure on drivers to deliver within a set day. if he slams the gate, is it evidence he is causing damage, or is the noise a irritant to yourself? You could put a sign up or buy a signing asking to close the gate gentle???? can you hear the door bell from the door? he might be ringing, not hearing and therefore knocking. In trhe notes section of the be livery page, there is a note section, although there is not 100 per cent these notes would be read as these drivers are constantly rushing.  I did a google search for you, i found this and you can try the envri website Contact Us | Evri   To complain to Evri, you can follow these steps: Contact Customer Service: Call Evri's customer service at 0330 808 5456 for assistance with your complaint.    1 Write a Letter: Address your complaint to Capitol House, 1 Capitol Close, Morley, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS27 0WH.    1 Use the Official Website: Visit the Evri complaints page on their official website for detailed instructions on how to submit a complaint.    2 Email or Call for Specific Issues: For issues like missing or damaged parcels, you can email or call 0800 988 8888, which is free to call.    1 These methods will help you effectively communicate your concerns to Evri.   My driver is called anthony, he is brilliant to be honest. I cant fault him.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...